"The AGE" doesn't know the WADA Code

[slashin_velvet]

I think the unbroken narrative rules for circumstantial cases is a commonly overlooked point when thinking about "comfortable satisfaction". The tribunal must have a comfortable satisfaction that the narrative is unbroken. Not merely a warm feeling that the overall weight of evidence leans strongly towards the violation having taken place, as we tend to think of it .

Therefore it is conceivable that discrediting a single and apparently unspectacular item of evidence might break the narrative, and break the case, despite masses of evidence pointing towards the case being proven.

Regardless, the evidence must be presented by essendon players?

 

[fishardansin]

How would you know? I'd say they would have a very high degree of confidence, as would your club who are so scared they have to hope the fed court will save them.

I'm basing that on what is known publicly. I can't comment on any evidence that ASADA have managed to keep to itself.

 

[jenny61_99]

Little is not my president. His statements asserting that the players have not been administered illegal drugs may not have relevance but those statements are not false. Jon Pierik's statement in the OP is false.

No, just irrelevant. Pedant at it's best.

 

[fishardansin]

Ok so how about if there is confidence at EFC that nothing untoward happened they just let ASADA fall over as they can't prove that prohibited substances were administered.
Why fight to have evidence deemed unusable if that evidence proves nothing.

The exact same thing can be said of ASADA's evidence. If they are reliant on evidence gathered prior to interim report then it's highly doubtful they'll be able to prove a case against Essendon. If they've gathered enough damning evidence against Essendon in interviews conducted with Charters and Alavi after September then why are they fighting the case? Why don't they agree to have that evidence dumped and use what they have that is damning?

Even if they can't ban a particular player at Essendon by not being able to pin point exactly who had the TB4 shots proving that there was TB4 at Essendon and most likely used on players there will be some nuts kicked no doubt. Probably wont be Hird if he can show that his interest in the program was purely keeping up with things in the footy department and did genuinely insist that it was legit, similarly Reid. However, those that were supposed to manage Dank and Robinson will cop the nut bashing and Robinson and Dank will be banned for a long time, well Robinson could also be not directly responsible like Dank but as his manager will get in similar trouble to Corcoran and Hamilton.

Hird will probably be sacked for insisting upon Corcoran, which in my eyes led to having blurred chains of command with Hamilton and a major reason why Dank could potentially hide some very dodgy behaviour.

 

[Laphroaig]

Absolutely correct. It will go to the ADRV panel if after a players response ASADA thinks that they have a case to answer. Then at the tribunal ASADA will have to prove that that particular player (at each of the 34 trials if they were to go ahead) was administered TB4 (or any other banned substance).

So at this stage I'd agree that there is a case to answer or evidence should be put on the table, depends which way you want to spin that. However, if ASADA doesn't have some killer evidence that they're holding back no player will get done on what we've already seen. In fact they can't say with a high degree of confidence that TB4 was actually at the club.

All we have is a "Thymosin" that Alavi says he wasn't sure what they were and Dank took them away for testing. Charters says it was TB4 that he imported. We don't have enough for 34 players.

You seriously believe that there is no evidence which we the public are unaware of?

I find that so utterly unlikely as to be unworthy of consideration.

 

[DonsRule]

You seriously believe that there is no evidence which we the public are unaware of?

I find that so utterly unlikely as to be unworthy of consideration.

While I agree, that goes both ways, Essendon may have documentations/information on this not in the public too; people carry on that Essendon did not have approval for AOd9604 because they can't find it on google etc.

Thats not to say it does not exist.

And yeah am aware AOD is a non issue reguarding the SCN

 

[Laphroaig]

While I agree, that goes both ways, Essendon may have documentations/information on this not in the public too; people carry on that Essendon did not have approval for AOd9604 because they can't find it on google etc.

Thats not to say it does not exist.

And yeah am aware AOD is a non issue reguarding the SCN

Possibly, but it makes no sense to withold definitive information which demonstrates innocence. Such evidence can end the matter nice and quick. You don't wait until the day of the trial to say "well I couldn't have done it because I was in a coma in hospital at the time it happened."

Whereas the investigator gets no benefit from early disclosure. And in many circumstances impedes his own investigation.

As for AOD, I await further information with interest. As things stand with AOD it places the S0 category at threat. Sooner or later that has to be dealt with one way or another, because S0 has to be protected or we may as well give up on drugs in sport.

 

[slashin_velvet]

While I agree, that goes both ways, Essendon may have documentations/information on this not in the public too; people carry on that Essendon did not have approval for AOd9604 because they can't find it on google etc.

Thats not to say it does not exist.

And yeah am aware AOD is a non issue reguarding the SCN

I reckon if EFC were in the clear on AOD, they would have leaked it early in the peice - before TB4 was even in the public view. I would suggest on the balance of probabilties, we would know less from the camp that has strict confidentiality obligations, and more from the camp/s that don't (EFC, AFL etc).

 

[Sector 7G]

You seriously believe that there is no evidence which we the public are unaware of?

I find that so utterly unlikely as to be unworthy of consideration.

"Reports that say there's -- that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things that we know that we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know" D Rumsfeld

 

[base615]

Bobby, you've said previously that you're not really into football so can you please change your supported team in your profile? People generally dislike us enough at the moment without your inane postings further colouring their views of Sydney supporters.

 

[Slax]

If Essendon were in possession of evidence that would clear the players then they would've played it a long time ago and saved themselves a few million dollars in legal fees. The fact that they are going to the court on the grounds of deeming the investigation illegal strongly suggests that they don't have a get out of jail free card.

If as some try an assert EFC are in possession of documentation that will clear the players, then the members should be hanging Paul Little and the rest of the baord from the nearest tree for wasting members money on lawyers. The reason everyone is coming up with their theories is because ASADA aren't leaking information. The AFL has long been a steady stream of leaked information, almost to the point where I wonder if they just gave Fairfax and News their own logins to the AFL computer system. Hird and EFC have leaked a lot of information too, they've been throwing out lines to appease supporters and bait to see if ASADA will bite and say something.

The assertions by the OP are false because it basis itself on parts of the code that occur before the SCN. Once that happens the investigation is over and you move to a different part of the WADA code.

 

[Art Corvelay]

What does a spin doctor pay out of curiosity?

I reckon I could bullshit about this saga pretty well if Essendon are happy to pay me to create an elias account (maybe I'll choose Brisbane to avert suspicion) and sprout the party lines.

This is nearly as good as when Hanke signed up to BigFooty

 

[fishardansin]

If Essendon were in possession of evidence that would clear the players then they would've played it a long time ago and saved themselves a few million dollars in legal fees. The fact that they are going to the court on the grounds of deeming the investigation illegal strongly suggests that they don't have a get out of jail free card.

If as some try an assert EFC are in possession of documentation that will clear the players, then the members should be hanging Paul Little and the rest of the baord from the nearest tree for wasting members money on lawyers. The reason everyone is coming up with their theories is because ASADA aren't leaking information. The AFL has long been a steady stream of leaked information, almost to the point where I wonder if they just gave Fairfax and News their own logins to the AFL computer system. Hird and EFC have leaked a lot of information too, they've been throwing out lines to appease supporters and bait to see if ASADA will bite and say something.

The assertions by the OP are false because it basis itself on parts of the code that occur before the SCN. Once that happens the investigation is over and you move to a different part of the WADA code.

Sorry but if the case against Essendon is that, despite all at the club demanding that players are given a supplement program that is both within the rules and safe for the players, the officer in charge of administering that program deceived the club and gave players a supplement that is against the rules how do you defend that?

They have handed in what they think is evidence to counter the claims with photos of vials of "thymomodulin" and a spreadsheeet of injection data for "thymodulin".

 

[fishardansin]

You seriously believe that there is no evidence which we the public are unaware of?

I find that so utterly unlikely as to be unworthy of consideration.

No. However, we can't assume that it exists either. Well it'd be naive that despite the efforts of the AFL last year that everything was leaked. However, I get the feeling if really damning evidence existed it would have been leaked, at least a little bit, and I don't think McDevit would have done his public tour trying to put the fear into players either.

However, I have never said definitely either way.

 

[Art Corvelay]

Sorry but if the case against Essendon is that, despite all at the club demanding that players are given a supplement program that is both within the rules and safe for the players, the officer in charge of administering that program deceived the club and gave players a supplement that is against the rules how do you defend that?

They have handed in what they think is evidence to counter the claims with photos of vials of "thymomodulin" and a spreadsheeet of injection data for "thymodulin".

It's a shame we've seen the text messages between Dank & Hird. Any claim Hird didn't know doesn't sway with me (or others I suspect). Lest we mention Dr Reid's letter.

 

[Bobby Charlton]

I reckon if EFC were in the clear on AOD, they would have leaked it early in the peice - before TB4 was even in the public view.

It is pretty difficult to prove that you didn't do something at some unspecified time "between about January and September 2012" which is the SCN text according to the Sunday Age's Samantha Lane who claims to have seen one of the SCNs.

I doubt many people possess documentation which would prove they did not commit murder at some unspecified time between those dates.

 

[DonsRule]

Possibly, but it makes no sense to withold definitive information which demonstrates innocence. Such evidence can end the matter nice and quick. You don't wait until the day of the trial to say "well I couldn't have done it because I was in a coma in hospital at the time it happened."

Whereas the investigator gets no benefit from early disclosure. And in many circumstances impedes his own investigation.

As for AOD, I await further information with interest. As things stand with AOD it places the S0 category at threat. Sooner or later that has to be dealt with one way or another, because S0 has to be protected or we may as well give up on drugs in sport.

Not saying ASADA didn't have that information (perhaps why they don't appear to be couching it), I'm refering to in the public domain.


I'm informed there is another reason it would not have leaked if it was there, it may depend on exactly how the law reads; even if ASADA advised it was legal, that is not a binding decision.

I court could easily find the advice was incorrect and you are still punishable by law. However, ASADA in this case would have given otu incorrect advice (assuming the law agreed with that) and a few people lose their jobs.

Solution You'll still pay a penalty generally, but the advise disapears. ASADA does not have to go to their minister and explain why you stuffed up. ASADA look like they caught a bad guy, pat themselves on the back.

Why wouldn't Essendon leak it, well that is where it gets messy, you leak it what do ASADA have to lose in pushing it all the way, even id they have to drag it through court (CAS), they've been publicly shamed in giving out poor advice, you might as well cst that stone too and see if you can cause more damage (the full penalty).

You negociate to a point where you're happy to pay a penalty knowing how it may end in court where you have no control. Both sides are happy.

A few have seen that happen, Baldur again (sorry to drag you into my crap) suggested that kind of thing does happen.

 

[markm106]

The exact same thing can be said of ASADA's evidence. If they are reliant on evidence gathered prior to interim report then it's highly doubtful they'll be able to prove a case against Essendon. If they've gathered enough damning evidence against Essendon in interviews conducted with Charters and Alavi after September then why are they fighting the case? Why don't they agree to have that evidence dumped and use what they have that is damning?

Even if they can't ban a particular player at Essendon by not being able to pin point exactly who had the TB4 shots proving that there was TB4 at Essendon and most likely used on players there will be some nuts kicked no doubt. Probably wont be Hird if he can show that his interest in the program was purely keeping up with things in the footy department and did genuinely insist that it was legit, similarly Reid. However, those that were supposed to manage Dank and Robinson will cop the nut bashing and Robinson and Dank will be banned for a long time, well Robinson could also be not directly responsible like Dank but as his manager will get in similar trouble to Corcoran and Hamilton.

Hird will probably be sacked for insisting upon Corcoran, which in my eyes led to having blurred chains of command with Hamilton and a major reason why Dank could potentially hide some very dodgy behaviour.

I see your point. However ASADA don't want to investigate again and are going to argue the evidence be used anyway. If they lose that is.
Inwas also making the point EFC must be concerned that ASADA have something.

 

[hoianbulldog]

Probably wont be Hird if he can show that his interest in the program was purely keeping up with things in the footy department and did genuinely insist that it was legit, similarly Reid.

WOW...................Just WOW.
He is the frekn doctor.

 

[Bobby Charlton]

Bobby, you've said previously that you're not really into football so can you please change your supported team in your profile? People generally dislike us enough at the moment without your inane postings further colouring their views of Sydney supporters.

I've explained this previously a couple of times. Amongst AFL teams, I like Sydney to win - I lived in Sydney for a few years when I first came to Australia - so it is staying in my profile.
I've only been to Melbourne once - that was a 3 day business trip in 1989 (IIRC) and I thought the place seedy. I have no idea where Essendon is. Is it a suburb?
I joined bigfooty to learn more about the drug scandal not to discuss games, and I make no apology for it. It is interesting and I thank those who are sharing their views.

 

[Laphroaig]

I joined bigfooty to learn more about the drug scandal not to discuss games, and I make no apology for it.

Of course you did.

Strange then that you have done nothing but lecture the extreme end of one point of view, while aspiring to learn.

Not a very effective learning strategy.

 

[I Rock]

It is pretty difficult to prove that you didn't do something at some unspecified time "between about January and September 2012" which is the SCN text according to the Sunday Age's Samantha Lane who claims to have seen one of the SCNs.

I doubt many people possess documentation which would prove they did not commit murder at some unspecified time between those dates.

Tell me who I apparently killed and I can tell you where I were 48 hours either side of the Coroner's recorded time of death.

 

[I Rock]

Of course you did.

Strange then that you have done nothing but lecture the extreme end of one point of view, while aspiring to learn.

Not a very effective learning strategy.

I would also suggest the poster works on there back story a little. Unless of course convincing wasn't in the brief.

 

[Tiger2709]

Now who's stretching the truth? What on earth do you think the SC's are?

Don't worry Charlton is using semantics they are not necessarily illegal drugs but they are banned, all this BS from Essendon supporters means nothing if they are as guilty as most suspect, they will be punished, you have to forgive the poor cultists, they follow their messiah blindly to the Kool Aid jug.

 

[Argy]

I've explained this previously a couple of times. Amongst AFL teams, I like Sydney to win - I lived in Sydney for a few years when I first came to Australia - so it is staying in my profile.
I've only been to Melbourne once - that was a 3 day business trip in 1989 (IIRC) and I thought the place seedy. I have no idea where Essendon is. Is it a suburb?
I joined bigfooty to learn more about the drug scandal not to discuss games, and I make no apology for it. It is interesting and I thank those who are sharing their views.

Bobby, I have sympathy for swans supporters on this forum (and that's hard for a hawk to say!). You clearly have no interest in the Swans and are only making their supporters feel angry and uncomfortable.

You really should nominate a different team out of respect. If you can't nominate "no team" then I suggest you change it to Essendon.